Citizens for a Fair Vote Count recently held their first national
conference on vote fraud in Cincinnati, Ohio on August 25-27. (See
Spotlight article Sept. 11, 2000)

I
was invited to speak about my 4 years of legal research while prosecuting
a lawsuit,with my brother
Dennis Gutenkauf, against Maricopa County for deprivation of our
constitutionalrights while voting in the last Presidential election.The highlight of the conference was a strategy session to ensure
clean counting procedures and verifiable results in the upcoming election
on November 7, 2000. This article is a summary of what two Arizona
citizens accomplished to advance voters' rights, and what the average
citizen can do at the polls in this election.

After hearing a
speech by the late Votescam
author Jim Collier, Dennis and I attempted to monitor the vote count after
the polls closed at our precinct in Tempe, Arizona on November 5, 1996. I
did some research on Arizona's election statutes and found A.R.S 16-601
(tally of the vote) and the corresponding attorney general's opinion. We
gave a photocopy to the election workers. The tally of the vote statute
provides that as soon as the polls close, the election workers shall
immediately count the ballots cast. "The count shall be public, in
the presence of bystanders."The notes of decisions interpreting the
statute cites an Arizona case, Averyt
v Williams,holding that
"the object of electionlaws
isto prevent fraud, and to guarantee
to the voter the registration and count of his ballot." The election workers had not been trained
in election law as required, and in spite of the statute, they threatened
us with arrest if we did not leave. We tape recorded the incident and
entered the tape as evidence in a subsequent lawsuit in Federal District
Court.

The District Court denied us our right to a
civil trial by jury under the Seventh Amendment, and improperly dismissed
our lawsuit, ignoring the 39 exhibits which proved the knowing and
intentional violation of our rights. The Court also ignored the Supreme
Court's rulings on the right to be free of intimidation while exercising
the right to vote. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower
court's unpublished ruling, again in conflict with the Supreme Court, and
in conflict with it's own previous rulings. TheU.S. Supreme Court abdicated its responsibility to exerciseits supervisory powers over the renegade lower courts, and it
denied our petition for review. Our case wouldhave been a landmark ruling regarding voter's rights in a federal
election. In a classic example of judicial tyranny, the courts failed to
uphold the constitutional and statutory provisions of election law. It was
a political hot potato because Arizona's Governor and Secretary of State
were defendants, and our evidence and case law were unrefuted.

However, the correctness of our
position was affirmed in the 1998 election worker's training manual. As a
result of our lawsuit, Maricopa County was now forced to train election
workers that voters could be present for the ballot count and videotape
the proceedings after the polls close. We reversed Maricopa County's
longstanding policy of threatening and intimidating voters who wanted to
witness the vote count at the polls.

Our policy victory carries dramatic
implications for the other 49 states where voters have been threatened
with arrest.I am currently
researching the vote count statutes in the other 49 states. Some states,
such as North Carolina and California, are similar to Arizona in providing
for a public count of the ballots, with bystanders in attendance. Other
states only allow election judges or previously registered political party
representatives to monitor the count. However, the Supreme Court has
ruled, in U.S v Mosley (1915) and Reynolds v Sims (1964),that the right to vote also includes the right to have your vote
honestly counted.

Even if the state election law does
not contain a specific provision for members of the public to be present
at the poll closing for the count, citizens can assert their rights
protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment guarantees the right
of citizens to peaceably assemble and to petition the government for
redress of grievances. Certainly voter fraud is a public grievance. The
purposeof the First
Amendment is to promote honesty of government by seeing to it that public
business functions under the hard light of full public scrutiny. See Tennessean
Newspapers Inc. v Federal Housing Administration. The operative
principle is that when the polls are closed to voting, they are open to
the public for counting. Election results are public record. The Ninth
Circuit ruled in Fordyce v City of Seattle (1995) that videotaping
matters of public interest is First Amendment protected activity. And the
Supreme Court ruled in Thomas v. Collins (1944) that the device of
requiring previous registration as a condition for exercising the rights
of free speech and free assembly is incompatible with the requirements of
the First Amendment.

It is currently illegal in 49 states for citizens
to examine the computer software that counts their ballots. The reason
given is that the software is "proprietary information" or a
"trade secret". However, an Arizona attorney general's opinion
(I79-215) states that trade secrets are not exempt from inspection as
public records and "other matters" In a new York case, Sachs
v Cluett Peabody and Company,if
the software is patented, it is no longer a trade secret because a patent
amounts to publication. And in a North Carolina case, FMC
Corp. v Cyprus Foote Mineral Co.,trade secrets are not shown if there is evidence that the same
technology could be purchased on the market from three or four other
vendors. Only the vendors know how the software counts our ballots. Thus,
a computer count amounts to a secret count, which defeats the legislative intent of the public
count statute.

Even if the elections department allowed
public inspection of the computer software program that counts our
ballots, computer vote fraud is invisible and undetectable. We must,
therefore, DEMAND a manual count of the ballots at the polls, and compare the
results with the computer tabulation at the central counting center.This is only means of achieving honest, verifiable election
results. It is not the citizen's burden to prove voter fraud, it is the
elections department's burden to prove that they are administering clean
elections.

The Declaration of Independence asserts the
government derives it just powers "from the consent of the
governed". The government works for us. As Jesus Christ said "
The slave is not greater than the master." WE THE PEOPLE are the
master, and our public servants are bound by the chains of the
Constitution. The courts have ruled that it is the citizen's job to keep
the government from falling into error.

One of the purposesof government is to protect our rights When government becomes
destructive of its purpose, it is the right of the people to alter or
abolish it. We have a right to alter the way our public servants conduct
our business. The purpose of the election board is to make sure that the
voters' intent is accurately determined. As demonstrated in the Relevance
magazine article "Pandora's Black Box", (November 1996), there
is no way to prevent voter fraud when the ballots are counted by
computer.Therefore, we must demand a
manual count of the ballots at the poll.

There are election statutes in each state
with penalties for the refusal of election workers to perform their duty.
They can be sued for nonfeasance with civil and criminal liability. As the
late Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen once said "When they feel the
heat, they see the light." And as the engraving on the Arizona
Supreme Court building says "Where the Law Begins, Tyranny
Ends." We must know the law ourselves and enforce the mandatory
duties of our election officials.

The court stated in US v Wesberry
that the right to vote is the highest right we have as citizens, and
without it, all other rights are purely illusory.In her book"101Things To Do 'Til The Revolution", author Claire Wolfe asserts
emphatically"Never
beg for your rights. Free people never beg for fundamental rights like
free speech, freedom of association, self defense, worship and freedom to
travel. Don't sit around and wait for Congress or the state legislature to
"fix" violated rights."

(ed.
note: The only laws and rights that exist are the ones that you are
personally willing to enforce) "Never, never beg or negotiate for
your rights. Take them. If enough of us do, no government in the world can
stand in our way."

To keep our rights, we must be informed and
involved. Check out the website for Citizens for a Fair Vote Count
(www.votefraud.org). We cannot afford the luxury of apathy or
discouragement. We must vote and
make sure that our vote is accurately
counted manually at the polls. Recruit and assign other voters to
attend the vote count at the polls with you. Take a tape recorder or
videocamera to document the incident.

And if you don't like either of the two
globalist Republicrats who are running, then vote for a candidate with
Constitutional and Godly principles such as Pat Buchanan or Howard
Phillips. As John Quincy Adams said "Always vote for a principle,
though you vote alone, and you may cherish the sweet reflection that your
vote is never lost." With honest elections restored, with citizens
voting for principle instead of the lesser of two evils, and with the
grace of God, we just might restore America to her original greatness. The
average citizen can make a difference! I know because my brother and I
did.

Dan Gutenkauf is a graduate of Drake University
with a B.A. in Psychology. He and his bother Dennis are professional
musicians and members of the Legal Research Society in Phoenix.